I have published via peer review, so know the process well enough from bitter experience (at least in my forensic field). I have been left aghast by the literature relating to the C19 injections and the growing body of work relating to technologies arising from them. In those areas, peer review seems to be sorely lacking in the actual review department.
I do not know. I self-funded my own research and earned my publications after great personal effort and with no knowledge of a successful outcome in the end.
But I disagree a bit about the use of AI chat bots in research. You mention that "there is a major concern with people abandoning their critical thinking and research skills in favor of simply asking the AI bot for an answer." That is absolutely a major concern. But to me that is not the biggest concern. The main issue for me is that using AI products empowers them.
There's an anti-humanist angle to the mass deployment of AI. As a practical matter, you are correct that it is possible for an individual to use AI products without becoming dependent on them. But huge numbers of people will in fact become dependent on AI and gradually lose the capacity to do their own critical thinking and research. And the more that people use AI systems, the more effective the AI systems become at reducing people to dependent, domesticated animals.
It's primarily a moral issue, not a practical issue. In my view anyway. To use an analogy, I may be able to use a drug occasionally and carefully to enjoy it without becoming dependent on it, but in doing so I contribute directly to the harm/destruction wrought by drugs (addiction, violent cartels, etc.).
Yes, didn't Blavatsky and Steiner both warn us about The Eighth Sphere more than a century ago? They warned that the misuse of technology could lead to negative spiritual consequences, such as the creation of an environment that hinders spiritual evolution. They suggested that emerging technologies, such as the integration of nanoscale technologies and virtual reality, could potentially contribute to the formation of the Eighth Sphere, representing a possible future evolution of humanity driven further towards complete materialization and mechanization. It's an inviting trap into which to fall :(
“There is no end to education. It is not that you read a book, pass an examination, and finish with education. The whole of life, from the moment you are born to the moment you die, is a process of learning.” — Jiddu Krishnamurti
"Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever." --- Mahatma Gandhi
“The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” — Alvin Toffler
“No problem can withstand the assault of sustained thinking.” — Voltaire
In an interview with Paul Offitt which I transcribed, he admitted he got kick-backs from some pharmaceutical companies. Maybe he was talking about royalties. In any case, he's not an objective witness. And none of the childhood vaccines have been double-blind tested. NONE. That's what Kennedy is talking about doing, for the first time. All the Baby Boomers who were vaccinated have been exposed to viruses from the monkey kidneys those vaccines were grown in that make us susceptible to cancer. Don't do that to your kids or grandkids. You're nuts to allow a doctor, whom you probably don't know very well, to tell you to stick a needle in your baby's arm and inject foreign substances whose origins you do not know to forever be part of your child's biology. These vaccines do NOT protect your kids from acquiring these illnesses. And the docs are giving WAY too many injections WAY too early in their lives. Respect and trust your immune systems.
IF A DOCTOR CAN LEARN ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY AND IMMUNOLOGY AND VIROLOGY, SO CAN YOU. THEY ARE NOT THE BRIGHTEST OF THE BRIGHT. NOR ARE THEY GOD. A lot of them don't know how to think for themselves. They are taught to follow in med school. They are taught to parrot. You have to think for yourself for your kid's survival. And that includes everything. Don't give that kid a cell phone just because her best friend has one.
There are tons of science-based stories on Children's Defense Fund's web-site. Whatever you think about Kennedy's politics, there are lots of scientists, doctors, researchers' interviews on that site. Poke around and learn something. CHD.org. Offitt is a narcissist who tells half of what he knows. I have his interview on tape. He also knows the vaccines the military were forced to get for the Gulf War created Gulf War Syndrome WHICH CAN BE PASSED ON TO THEIR CHILDREN THROUGH DNA MUTATIONS CAUSED BY THE VACCINES. Do your own research. There's too much riding on this.
Alternatively, you can pick out a baby- or child-sized coffin, "just in case".
“It’s not what people think that’s important, but the reason they think what they think!”
—Eugene Ionesco
We find “reasons” when we do our own research, and live life based on wise decisions — many times that go against the current narratives — even from “experts”.
We are each unique, thus, life is not a “one-size-fits-all” existence.
This article only confirms what I have done instinctively for the last several years. The biggest problem is getting my adult children to do it. Sure, listen to the voices you trust, but know that it is DANGEROUS not to do your own research as well. If you consistently look at all sides, the undeniable truth will rise. Right on, RFK Jr!
Peer review is ideologically problematic because it's essentially a way to gatekeep any truly new information or hypothesis from entering the industry. It's meant to be a "quality control" but that's not how it works in reality. It's like a protection racket for existing profit generation. Several retired journal editors have said that the medical journals and the peer review process is not trustworthy. I learned that peer reviewers don't even have access to the raw data used to write up a study and its results! What?! That's so ridiculous. There's a dozen or so other serious problems (maybe more?) with published medical research papers.
Ultimately, the pharmaceutical industry generates so much revenue that they really can control any aspect of society that relies on their money/advertising/grants/donations/etc (the education system, medical journals, media, politicians, health care, public health agencies, regulatory agencies, etc - all captured.)
Having said that, I started a deep dive into researching vaccines in 2018. I didn't have a predetermined end. I just wanted to know the truth. What was interesting is that it was fairly easy to find skeptical information about vaccines in 2018 by just doing a quick google search. By doing a quick google search, you could come across vaccine skeptics who would write articles about the dangers and unknown risks of vaccines as well as some of the known risks. In those articles, they would often link to several peer reviewed articles that you could then click on and read actual peer reviewed articles that clearly showed that vaccines were neither proven to be safe nor effective. I was pretty horrified at how deceived I had been about vaccines. I also read several great books, including Suzanne Humphrey's, "Dissolving Illusions". My mind was blown and I started warning why adult children, thank goodness.
About mid 2019, I was no longer able to find the articles that I had once read by doing a quick google search. If I had recorded the exact names and web address of the peer reviewed papers, I could find them. But if I could only just generally remember the topic, I couldn't find papers and articles that I knew existed. Different search engines would generate different results.
I also noticed that Pinterest suddenly wouldn't allow me to save articles on my private board where I was keeping links to articles with links to vaccine research/information. I thought it was strange that these new censorship tactics were being implemented because it seemed random. When 2020 hit, it all made sense. It was definitely pre-planned to try and coerce everyone on the planet to take the new mRNA injections. There is no doubt in my mind of a coordinated conspiracy after that experience, combined with the rest of the covid clown show.
Telling people not to do their own research is akin to telling people not to read. I get that they think we are too ignorant to think for ourselves and honestly, they aren't that wrong in general. People are pretty easily duped. I can look back and see many times when I was easily tricked into believing false things. But the answer is more individual research, not less. And that is the most sinister part of it all.
The silver lining of covid is the general loss of trust by many people in the general population. When the powers-that-be tell you not to research/read, you can know that they do not have your best interest at heart. They need you to trust them in order to continue to use you badly, and they know you won't continue to trust them if you learn the truth.
In the case of ending gain of function research - in my opinion they use a language or definition trick because instead of using gain OF function they use only LOSS of function research …
Loss-of-function, gain-of-function and dominant-negative mutations have profoundly different effects on protein structure
Lukas Gerasimavicius, Benjamin J. Livesey & Joseph A. Marsh
Most known pathogenic mutations occur in protein-coding regions of DNA and change the way proteins are made. Taking protein structure into account has therefore provided great insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying human genetic disease. While there has been much focus on how mutations can disrupt protein structure and thus cause a loss of function (LOF), alternative mechanisms, specifically dominant-negative (DN) and gain-of-function (GOF) effects, are less understood. Here, we investigate the protein-level effects of pathogenic missense mutations associated with different molecular mechanisms. We observe striking differences between recessive vs dominant, and LOF vs non-LOF mutations, with dominant, non-LOF disease mutations having much milder effects on protein structure, and DN mutations being highly enriched at protein interfaces. We also find that nearly all computational variant effect predictors, even those based solely on sequence conservation, underperform on non-LOF mutations. However, we do show that non-LOF mutations could potentially be identified by their tendency to cluster in three-dimensional space. Overall, our work suggests that many pathogenic mutations that act via DN and GOF mechanisms are likely being missed by current variant prioritisation strategies, but that there is considerable scope to improve computational predictions through consideration of molecular disease mechanisms.
Great article. I wouldn't believe those in power . Especially when it's been proven they are scum bag liars while million have died from their advice. F tards. Don't believe shit coming out of their mouths. Goes for chump tard to. But trust the plan, 69 d chess.
What's the difference between a stroller and a needle, life and death, no matter what that smack talking bitch says at the Washington Post brought to you by the CIA, same guy's protecting Fauci, nuff said
Someone should inform RFKjr that we don't live in a democracy. Neither do we live under the republican form of government described in Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. IMO, since December 23rd 1913, we live in a central banking imperial oligarchy controlled by the Federal Reserve and the Bank for International Settlements. It troubles me that the Secretary of HHS does not appreciate this reality. If we did live in a democracy the majority of people would not have approved the U.S. Constitution in 1787, let alone allowing any dissent to majority opinion. That was why the press was barred from the Constitutional Convention. Censorship of the minority is a natural consequence of democracy. He should have said "Pursuant to the first amendment of the Bill Of Rights...the responsibility of parents is to do your own research."
I think it was Schmidt, or some other globalist media fraudster who said, I paraphrase: All questions should have one answer. So, having first created a glut ('tsunami' was the word used for media squid-ink during Covid) of information, he will decide what you need to know and how you need to know it.
I have published via peer review, so know the process well enough from bitter experience (at least in my forensic field). I have been left aghast by the literature relating to the C19 injections and the growing body of work relating to technologies arising from them. In those areas, peer review seems to be sorely lacking in the actual review department.
How much does a favorable peer review cost these days?!
I do not know. I self-funded my own research and earned my publications after great personal effort and with no knowledge of a successful outcome in the end.
Kudos to you. Working within a corrupt system is especially difficult/painful for people of integrity.
All well said and appreciated.
But I disagree a bit about the use of AI chat bots in research. You mention that "there is a major concern with people abandoning their critical thinking and research skills in favor of simply asking the AI bot for an answer." That is absolutely a major concern. But to me that is not the biggest concern. The main issue for me is that using AI products empowers them.
There's an anti-humanist angle to the mass deployment of AI. As a practical matter, you are correct that it is possible for an individual to use AI products without becoming dependent on them. But huge numbers of people will in fact become dependent on AI and gradually lose the capacity to do their own critical thinking and research. And the more that people use AI systems, the more effective the AI systems become at reducing people to dependent, domesticated animals.
It's primarily a moral issue, not a practical issue. In my view anyway. To use an analogy, I may be able to use a drug occasionally and carefully to enjoy it without becoming dependent on it, but in doing so I contribute directly to the harm/destruction wrought by drugs (addiction, violent cartels, etc.).
Yes, didn't Blavatsky and Steiner both warn us about The Eighth Sphere more than a century ago? They warned that the misuse of technology could lead to negative spiritual consequences, such as the creation of an environment that hinders spiritual evolution. They suggested that emerging technologies, such as the integration of nanoscale technologies and virtual reality, could potentially contribute to the formation of the Eighth Sphere, representing a possible future evolution of humanity driven further towards complete materialization and mechanization. It's an inviting trap into which to fall :(
“There is no end to education. It is not that you read a book, pass an examination, and finish with education. The whole of life, from the moment you are born to the moment you die, is a process of learning.” — Jiddu Krishnamurti
"Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever." --- Mahatma Gandhi
“The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” — Alvin Toffler
“No problem can withstand the assault of sustained thinking.” — Voltaire
The revolution will not be televised.
I understand that to mean that it's not going to be a central win but many small wins.
After all, the predator class doesn't have a connection to the real world like the truly wise do.
https://robc137.substack.com/p/left-brain-vs-whole-brain-in-battlestar
In an interview with Paul Offitt which I transcribed, he admitted he got kick-backs from some pharmaceutical companies. Maybe he was talking about royalties. In any case, he's not an objective witness. And none of the childhood vaccines have been double-blind tested. NONE. That's what Kennedy is talking about doing, for the first time. All the Baby Boomers who were vaccinated have been exposed to viruses from the monkey kidneys those vaccines were grown in that make us susceptible to cancer. Don't do that to your kids or grandkids. You're nuts to allow a doctor, whom you probably don't know very well, to tell you to stick a needle in your baby's arm and inject foreign substances whose origins you do not know to forever be part of your child's biology. These vaccines do NOT protect your kids from acquiring these illnesses. And the docs are giving WAY too many injections WAY too early in their lives. Respect and trust your immune systems.
IF A DOCTOR CAN LEARN ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY AND IMMUNOLOGY AND VIROLOGY, SO CAN YOU. THEY ARE NOT THE BRIGHTEST OF THE BRIGHT. NOR ARE THEY GOD. A lot of them don't know how to think for themselves. They are taught to follow in med school. They are taught to parrot. You have to think for yourself for your kid's survival. And that includes everything. Don't give that kid a cell phone just because her best friend has one.
There are tons of science-based stories on Children's Defense Fund's web-site. Whatever you think about Kennedy's politics, there are lots of scientists, doctors, researchers' interviews on that site. Poke around and learn something. CHD.org. Offitt is a narcissist who tells half of what he knows. I have his interview on tape. He also knows the vaccines the military were forced to get for the Gulf War created Gulf War Syndrome WHICH CAN BE PASSED ON TO THEIR CHILDREN THROUGH DNA MUTATIONS CAUSED BY THE VACCINES. Do your own research. There's too much riding on this.
Alternatively, you can pick out a baby- or child-sized coffin, "just in case".
“It’s not what people think that’s important, but the reason they think what they think!”
—Eugene Ionesco
We find “reasons” when we do our own research, and live life based on wise decisions — many times that go against the current narratives — even from “experts”.
We are each unique, thus, life is not a “one-size-fits-all” existence.
Thank you Nosey for what you share!
The experts and the MSM can all go to Hades.
This article only confirms what I have done instinctively for the last several years. The biggest problem is getting my adult children to do it. Sure, listen to the voices you trust, but know that it is DANGEROUS not to do your own research as well. If you consistently look at all sides, the undeniable truth will rise. Right on, RFK Jr!
Yes, we need to keep it human.
Great tips.
Peer review is ideologically problematic because it's essentially a way to gatekeep any truly new information or hypothesis from entering the industry. It's meant to be a "quality control" but that's not how it works in reality. It's like a protection racket for existing profit generation. Several retired journal editors have said that the medical journals and the peer review process is not trustworthy. I learned that peer reviewers don't even have access to the raw data used to write up a study and its results! What?! That's so ridiculous. There's a dozen or so other serious problems (maybe more?) with published medical research papers.
Ultimately, the pharmaceutical industry generates so much revenue that they really can control any aspect of society that relies on their money/advertising/grants/donations/etc (the education system, medical journals, media, politicians, health care, public health agencies, regulatory agencies, etc - all captured.)
Having said that, I started a deep dive into researching vaccines in 2018. I didn't have a predetermined end. I just wanted to know the truth. What was interesting is that it was fairly easy to find skeptical information about vaccines in 2018 by just doing a quick google search. By doing a quick google search, you could come across vaccine skeptics who would write articles about the dangers and unknown risks of vaccines as well as some of the known risks. In those articles, they would often link to several peer reviewed articles that you could then click on and read actual peer reviewed articles that clearly showed that vaccines were neither proven to be safe nor effective. I was pretty horrified at how deceived I had been about vaccines. I also read several great books, including Suzanne Humphrey's, "Dissolving Illusions". My mind was blown and I started warning why adult children, thank goodness.
About mid 2019, I was no longer able to find the articles that I had once read by doing a quick google search. If I had recorded the exact names and web address of the peer reviewed papers, I could find them. But if I could only just generally remember the topic, I couldn't find papers and articles that I knew existed. Different search engines would generate different results.
I also noticed that Pinterest suddenly wouldn't allow me to save articles on my private board where I was keeping links to articles with links to vaccine research/information. I thought it was strange that these new censorship tactics were being implemented because it seemed random. When 2020 hit, it all made sense. It was definitely pre-planned to try and coerce everyone on the planet to take the new mRNA injections. There is no doubt in my mind of a coordinated conspiracy after that experience, combined with the rest of the covid clown show.
Telling people not to do their own research is akin to telling people not to read. I get that they think we are too ignorant to think for ourselves and honestly, they aren't that wrong in general. People are pretty easily duped. I can look back and see many times when I was easily tricked into believing false things. But the answer is more individual research, not less. And that is the most sinister part of it all.
The silver lining of covid is the general loss of trust by many people in the general population. When the powers-that-be tell you not to research/read, you can know that they do not have your best interest at heart. They need you to trust them in order to continue to use you badly, and they know you won't continue to trust them if you learn the truth.
In the case of ending gain of function research - in my opinion they use a language or definition trick because instead of using gain OF function they use only LOSS of function research …
Loss-of-function, gain-of-function and dominant-negative mutations have profoundly different effects on protein structure
Lukas Gerasimavicius, Benjamin J. Livesey & Joseph A. Marsh
Nature Communications volume 13, Article number: 3895 (2022) Cite this article
Abstract
Most known pathogenic mutations occur in protein-coding regions of DNA and change the way proteins are made. Taking protein structure into account has therefore provided great insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying human genetic disease. While there has been much focus on how mutations can disrupt protein structure and thus cause a loss of function (LOF), alternative mechanisms, specifically dominant-negative (DN) and gain-of-function (GOF) effects, are less understood. Here, we investigate the protein-level effects of pathogenic missense mutations associated with different molecular mechanisms. We observe striking differences between recessive vs dominant, and LOF vs non-LOF mutations, with dominant, non-LOF disease mutations having much milder effects on protein structure, and DN mutations being highly enriched at protein interfaces. We also find that nearly all computational variant effect predictors, even those based solely on sequence conservation, underperform on non-LOF mutations. However, we do show that non-LOF mutations could potentially be identified by their tendency to cluster in three-dimensional space. Overall, our work suggests that many pathogenic mutations that act via DN and GOF mechanisms are likely being missed by current variant prioritisation strategies, but that there is considerable scope to improve computational predictions through consideration of molecular disease mechanisms.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31686-6
I try to always keep my mind open. It's a major feature of critical thinking. 🤔
Great article. I wouldn't believe those in power . Especially when it's been proven they are scum bag liars while million have died from their advice. F tards. Don't believe shit coming out of their mouths. Goes for chump tard to. But trust the plan, 69 d chess.
What's the difference between a stroller and a needle, life and death, no matter what that smack talking bitch says at the Washington Post brought to you by the CIA, same guy's protecting Fauci, nuff said
Someone should inform RFKjr that we don't live in a democracy. Neither do we live under the republican form of government described in Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. IMO, since December 23rd 1913, we live in a central banking imperial oligarchy controlled by the Federal Reserve and the Bank for International Settlements. It troubles me that the Secretary of HHS does not appreciate this reality. If we did live in a democracy the majority of people would not have approved the U.S. Constitution in 1787, let alone allowing any dissent to majority opinion. That was why the press was barred from the Constitutional Convention. Censorship of the minority is a natural consequence of democracy. He should have said "Pursuant to the first amendment of the Bill Of Rights...the responsibility of parents is to do your own research."
LOL You don’t always need THAT many books. ;)
I think it was Schmidt, or some other globalist media fraudster who said, I paraphrase: All questions should have one answer. So, having first created a glut ('tsunami' was the word used for media squid-ink during Covid) of information, he will decide what you need to know and how you need to know it.
👏 👏 👏